If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

DirectX with games on windows usually perform better because the game engine usually (not always) has more optimizations for DirectX than openGL. If properly optimized, they will perform similarly (see valve's lfd port).

There are plenty of examples of unoptimized ports, I've personally dealt with NS2. In NS2 I can get 200fps with DirectX9, but with the OpenGL renderer I will only get 80-100 fps with several options turned down. I also get about 100fps with several options turned down with DirectX11 for the game. The reason is that these are new render modes for the game and they are currently both buggy and unoptimized, while the directX9 renderer has been continuously optimized over the last 4 years.

It is not the fault of the graphics drivers if the developer does a bad DirectX to OpenGL port.

It's not about whose fault is it, it's about end user results. We need benchmarks that use the default graphics stack for a platform/game. If a game targets DirectX primarily and is optimized for it then it should be DirectX that is used for the benchmark, not the unoptimized code that targets OpenGL. End users don't care whether DirectX or OpenGL is used, they only care about end results.

Speaking of end user results, this guy made a quick comparison for Metro:LL between Windows and SteamOS and it seems it's performing pretty much equally on both platforms, which is great to see (scroll down to the last video):http://hexus.net/gaming/news/pc/6382...videos-emerge/

It's not about whose fault is it, it's about end user results. We need benchmarks that use the default graphics stack for a platform/game. If a game targets DirectX primarily and is optimized for it then it should be DirectX that is used for the benchmark, not the unoptimized code that targets OpenGL. End users don't care whether DirectX or OpenGL is used, they only care about end results.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I see these kind of reviews as more of a graphics driver progress report, to see if the underlying system has any performance problems.

For those NVIDIA gaming customers running Microsoft Windows 8.1 that have been thinking about giving Valve's SteamOS Linux-based gaming platform a try, here are some early benchmarks of the SteamOS 1.0 beta that compare the performance to Microsoft Windows 8.1 Pro x64 on multiple NVIDIA GeForce graphics cards.

For those NVIDIA gaming customers running Microsoft Windows 8.1 that have been thinking about giving Valve's SteamOS Linux-based gaming platform a try, here are some early benchmarks of the SteamOS 1.0 beta that compare the performance to Microsoft Windows 8.1 Pro x64 on multiple NVIDIA GeForce graphics cards.

Windows 8.1 NVIDIA Performance,i think is good.

For curiosity I've benchmarked the performance between both OS's using a resolution of 2560x1440 8xMSAA, all settings maxed. Using a intel 4770k + GTX680 + 8GB rig.
I've reached the following numbers:

Win8.1 - 235,82fps
SteamOS - 153,65fps

I tried to apply the following Nvidia optimizations in launch options but the game refused to start. LD_PRELOAD="libpthread.so.0 libGL.so.1"__GL_THREADED_OPTIMIZATIONS=1

To simulate similar conditions I runned Steam windows client with -steamos prefix and Big picture mode.

Given the fact that different code path is used on Windows and Linux, testing a single game doesn't say much about SteamOS (or Linux).
Never the less, I would imagine that D3D Windows only games that get converted to Linux will suffer from higher over-head that will most likely be far more noticeable as the FPS increases.
160fps vs. 240fps is far less relevant than 40fps vs. 60fps.